- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bizarre Math Question and Answer breaks the internet - Sorry if already posted
Posted on 4/16/15 at 5:51 am to LNCHBOX
Posted on 4/16/15 at 5:51 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
Rewriting the problem as an equation, and knowing that the variable should equal 12 (x=9+3=12), 2 is the correct answer.
Interesting analysis.
But you are still making the assumption that in the "48/2x" statement, the 2x takes precedence over the 48/2.
In order to satisfy the PEMDAS fools, you would have to writhe "(48/2)(x)" or "48/(2x)" which is why PEMDAS is totally antithetical to algebra.
I got a degree in Electrical Engineering and worked on every manned space program the nation has ever funded at NASA = and I never heard of the acronym PEMDAS. When I was a high school sophomore, my teacher taught us about 'terms' and 'factors.' That is all that is needed - ever.
I learned about PEMDAS after I retired and started teaching math at my local high school in 2002. I have hated it ever since because it got in the way of teaching 'terms and factors.'
1
Posted on 4/16/15 at 5:52 am to KosmoCramer
Distributive property is key here folks. As written, 2(9+3) must be equal to 2(9)+2(3), which is of course 24. Thus 48/24=2. 288 would incorrectly apply the distributive property.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 5:56 am to Tigah in the ATL
quote:
PEMDAS MEANS NOTHING.
Let it be known that on the 16th of April in the year of our Lord 2015, at the time of 5:56 CDT, that I agree with Tigah in the ATL.
As it is written so let it be done.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 5:59 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
But you are still making the assumption that in the "48/2x" statement, the 2x takes precedence over the 48/2.
Incorrect, the order you move everything to one side of the equation doesn't change the answer. There is no way to get x=12 in the 288 equation.
quote:
In order to satisfy the PEMDAS fools, you would have to writhe "(48/2)(x)" or "48/(2x)" which is why PEMDAS is totally antithetical to algebra.
Again, no. The equation needs no parentheses to come to one unique answer.
quote:
I got a degree in Electrical Engineering and worked on every manned space program the nation has ever funded at NASA = and I never heard of the acronym PEMDAS.
No offense, but that doesn't make your opinion more valid than mine.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 6:09 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
No offense, but that doesn't make your opinion more valid than mine.
Didn't imply that it did - and I never take offense to statements made on any anonymous message board.
I THINK I was agreeing with you absolutely.
My anecdote was intended to demonstrate that PEMDAS was a recent invention that has no value other than to implant a flawed algorithm in the minds of elementary school students. My intention was to describe how reliance on the difference between terms and factors is the fundamental way to approach all such practical problems. PEMDAS only has relevance during arithmetic exercises in elementary school and can be ignored even then if one is careful about how a statement is written.
BTW - I was complimenting your analysis. You approached the problem as any functional engineer would approach it. I did point out however that in that approach, there had to be a divergence from the PEMDAS ritual in how you treat the "2x" as factor rather than separating the '2' from the 'x' as would be required by rigidly applying PEMDAS.
In other words, PEMDAS sucks - it has no place in an algebra world.
but it's all good - have a nice day.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 6:21 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
How many engineers got 288?
Not a one worth his salt.
Rather than teaching PEMDAS, math students should be taught to state problems clearly and to recognize ambiguity.
Any rational reading of this 'problem' would assign precedence to the 2(9+3) notation rather than blindly following PEMDAS.
The only time this problem would make any sense is in a discussion of how to clearly write a problem statement to avoid any possibility of misunderstanding.
and that's the troof
You're making an additional assumption by solving the 2(9+3). Pretending things exist that don't is not the most "rational" solution. As explicitly stated that answer is 288. Therefore, fewer assumptions = more logical approach.Posted on 4/16/15 at 6:28 am to Tigah in the ATL
quote:Can you tell us about "they" and why you know that " they" want us to see things that are not there? I think if they wanted us to read that way, they should have enclosed it in the parantheses. They didn't so you are just making assumptions without any evidence about what "they" were thinking.
Taken the way they want you to see it (by leaving out the multiplication sign) it's 2.
This post was edited on 4/16/15 at 6:32 am
Posted on 4/16/15 at 6:31 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
You're making an additional assumption by solving the 2(9+3).
nope.
288 is the correct answer to this question = "what is the result of applying the PEMDAS algorithm to the statement 48/2(9+3) ?"
It has no value elsewise.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 6:43 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
They didn't so you are just making assumptions without any evidence about what "they" were thinking.
Do you have any idea what 'they' would consider the solution to the statement "48/2x = ?" to be if we assigned 'x' the value of 9+3?
This post was edited on 4/16/15 at 6:45 am
Posted on 4/16/15 at 6:43 am to KosmoCramer
Wow are ppl still arguing this?
I'll admit at first glance I said it was 2 bc I'm out of practice with these.
But then I hit myself and said no dummy it's 288.
2(9+3) can be written as 2x(9+3)
Which everyone knows is 24.
Go type the equation into google if you don't believe this
I'll admit at first glance I said it was 2 bc I'm out of practice with these.
But then I hit myself and said no dummy it's 288.
2(9+3) can be written as 2x(9+3)
Which everyone knows is 24.
Go type the equation into google if you don't believe this
Posted on 4/16/15 at 6:46 am to Tiger1242
quote:
2(9+3) can be written as 2x(9+3)
Which everyone knows is 24.
which means that the answer is 2
Posted on 4/16/15 at 6:51 am to Tiger1242
quote:
Wow are ppl still arguing this?
Nobody is arguing the answer. Strictly following the PEMDAS order of operations, the way it is taught in elementary arithmetic class, the 'answer' is 288.
Reading the statement the way an adult engineer would read it, the 'answer' is 2.
take your pick.
The discussion is about how inappropriate PEMDAS is for application to algebra.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 7:08 am to Tiger1242
quote:
Go type the equation into google if you don't believe this
I did this and someones post on facebook said it was 48.
So I say 48.
Final answer, regis.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 7:35 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
Nobody is arguing the answer. Strictly following the PEMDAS order of operations, the way it is taught in elementary arithmetic class, the 'answer' is 288.
Reading the statement the way an adult engineer would read it, the 'answer' is 2.
And he'd still be wrong, so WTF does this mean?
This thread has certainly delivered the goods.
Smart guys with quality degrees are getting the wrong answer, thus the problem is ambiguous and doesn't apply in the real world?
If the author wanted the correct answer to be 2, the problem would have been written differently. End of story.
I'll put it another way - if you make no assumptions, the answer is 288. In make-believe land, with a few assumptions, the answer is 2. The former is correct, the latter is embarrassing.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 7:39 am to KosmoCramer
I can't tell if you 288 people are dumb as shite or just trolling. Either way this thread is funny.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 7:42 am to ksayetiger
I just finished reading this whole thread and it's pretty funny the amount of bad math done here. First, who writes a math equation like that? Second, all of you who keep writing it as 48/2(9+3) are not writing the same thing as 48÷2(9+3). When typing on a computer, 48/2(9+3) is implying the same thing as (48/2)(9+3), in which 288 is correct. The issue is the elementary/ambiguous way the equation is written because it leaves room for interpretation, and that is not how math problems are supposed to be written. That equation can be interpreted as either:
48
2(9+3)
or
48 (9+3)
2
Personally, I interpret it as 48 divided by 2(9+3), but once again, it's in a form that would never be used in any real math.
Also, to whoever laughed at the notion that you can work in any direction on 5-2+3=x, you can work it in any order if it is written correctly. The correct form is 5+(-2)+3=6...all subtraction is addition of negative numbers.
48
2(9+3)
or
48 (9+3)
2
Personally, I interpret it as 48 divided by 2(9+3), but once again, it's in a form that would never be used in any real math.
Also, to whoever laughed at the notion that you can work in any direction on 5-2+3=x, you can work it in any order if it is written correctly. The correct form is 5+(-2)+3=6...all subtraction is addition of negative numbers.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 7:43 am to AZTarheeel
quote:You want coming to the correct answer as the problem is written?
I can't tell if you 288 people are dumb as shite or just trolling. Either way this thread is funny.
Posted on 4/16/15 at 7:51 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:But the problem as written, not as an engineer would interpet it is 288. There is a reason that R and other math software result in 288 because as written, without any assumptions, the answer is 288. If you want the answer to result in 2, you need to add parantheses.
Nobody is arguing the answer. Strictly following the PEMDAS order of operations, the way it is taught in elementary arithmetic class, the 'answer' is 288.
Reading the statement the way an adult engineer would read it, the 'answer' is 2.
take your pick.
The discussion is about how inappropriate PEMDAS is for application to algebra.
This post was edited on 4/16/15 at 7:51 am
Posted on 4/16/15 at 7:58 am to buckeye_vol
Why is there multiplication privilege here?
What the hell did division do to anybody?
What the hell did division do to anybody?
Posted on 4/16/15 at 8:01 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
But the problem as written, not as an engineer would interpet it is 288. There is a reason that R and other math software result in 288 because as written, without any assumptions, the answer is 288. If you want the answer to result in 2, you need to add parantheses.
- Then go input the following equation exactly how you read it:
48
2(9+3)
you would get 288 in any math program if you just read it as is (48 divided by 2(9+3)) without using any logic.
Page 13 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News